S. Awan is an independent journalist, culture lover and student of history, navigating the depths of various aspects of culture, politics, music, film, the controversial and the weird.
Also a musician, and part-time freelance, involuntary human being. Also occasionally lives on the moon. Also is a ghost. And a cigarette butt that hasn't been put out properly; so, you know, there's still, like, smoke coming out of it and stuff...

A LAST WORD *on* the Last Word on the June 3rd London Attack & CCTV Footage…

The YouTube video I embedded into the post yesterday on the London Bridge attack CCTV footage no longer exists – the video was obviously taken down some time before or after I posted the article.

The footage I was trying to link to, as I explained in the previous post, showed a different, longer version of the CCTV footage to the version that was shown on mainstream outlets and most YouTube channels.

The version that most channels/websites are showing is a shortened version, which omits the following segment that I alluded to yesterday.

The reason is, as explained previously, ‘if you pay attention, the person in the white trousers who is shown being stabbed/attacked goes down and is presumably injured or incapacitated. The officers proceed to attack the perpetrators: however, when a police car starts rolling down the road, the victim in the white trousers is shown suddenly getting up and running off. Clearly, the person on the ground realised the car might’ve hit him and so he got up and ran off; but it does raise a question as to whether he was genuinely injured or not, just playing dead, or whether – as some people have suggested – this is a staged drill video and not real ‘terror attack’ footage.’

I actually was generally willing to accept the footage – even with this apparent flaw in it – as legit.

That was until I noticed how oddly YouTube was behaving in regard to the footage.

When the CCTV footage first came out, I saw the longer, unedited version in a few places – and saw about three or four different YouTube accounts that had uploaded this longer/unedited version and had pointed out the problem with the aforementioned person in the white trousers. I kept the URLs for all three, just in case one or more of them disappeared from YouTube.

Unfortunately, it seems all of these have been taken down by YouTube – leaving only the shorter/edited versions online.

Curiously, the reason given on the YouTube page for removing the ‘Matrix Breaks’ video I tried to link to yesterday read like this:‘This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s policy on violent or graphic content.’

Which is odd, if you think about it. Because all the other versions/uploads of the same footage are still up on multiple channels and haven’t been taken down. But, of course, those are all of the shorter/edited footage – the same version that appears on mainstream news sites.

So, if the aforementioned video was removed for its ‘violent or graphic content’, surely all other versions of the CCTV should be removed too, no? And how is it too ‘violent or graphic’ for YouTube and yet perfectly ok for every single major newspaper or media site?

Nope, seems like YouTube is being very selective in its censorship – choosing only to remove one version of the footage from multiple accounts, while keeping the other, official version of the footage on other channels.

Even more curious, I just went back to the same link for the same video and the ‘reason’ given for YouTube taking the video down has been changed. It now reads as ‘This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s policy on spam, deceptive practices, and scams.’

Curiouser and curiouser, as Alice said.

Even odder – and in keeping with my point that YouTube is happy with the edited/shorter versions of the CCTV footage, just not the original/longer version – the very same channel I was originally trying to link to (‘Matrix Breaks’) has *other videos* on the same CCTV footage (this one, for example), but which shows the edited/shortened version and not the longer version – and these are still up, clearly indicating that YouTube doesn’t mind him spouting conspiracy theories, but just doesn’t want the original, unedited CCTV footage to be up anywhere on its platform.

For a moment, a few days ago, I briefly wondered if my memory was playing tricks on me or if I was experiencing some weird ‘mandela effect’ type thing – because I clearly remembered seeing this longer footage, but now all I could find anywhere was the shorter footage.

My suspicion would be that the original edit went public, but the error or problem in the footage wasn’t noticed at first. When a few people then noticed the problem and started commenting on it, a shortened edit was made of the footage (cutting out the problematic section) and quickly became the *only* version allowed to be out there.

I’ve searched for a long time to find an upload somewhere of that original, longer version – and I can’t see it anywhere. Every upload I see now of the video is of the shorter/edited version.

None of this particular matters – as I said in the previous post on the subject, I’m not really depending on little nit-picky things to make the argument; my argument is based more on state-enabled terrorism and the macro level of these things.

However, the disappearance of all the versions of the footage I was trying to link to bothered me enough to warrant this second, clarification post on the matter.

This weirdness and sleight-of-hand with the CCTV footage and the YouTube uploads is interesting enough in itself, even beyond the subject of terror attacks. Considering how much really ‘out there’ stuff is allowed to stay up on YouTube (including hate speech, radicalisation content, graphic porn, rabid levels of conspiracy theory, etc), it’s always curious to note what kind of stuff gets taken down.

A last point: if anyone does come across the original footage I was talking about – the longer version of the CCTV – on YouTube or some other place, please get in touch. Or just paste/post the link right here in the comment section below.

Assuming that Raf’s footage is what you were looking for, S., I don’t find anything at all odd about the stabbing victim first going down, staying down for a brief moment, and then getting up and running away. There could be any number of psychological and physiological reasons for what we are observing. He may have fainted and then regained consciousness, for any number of reasons, and then under the momentary effects of adrenaline made an attempt to escape his predicament. To my mind, it is behavior that is consistent with trauma.

I’d be interested in hearing what a specialist in the physiological effects of stabbing trauma might have to say about the footage.

My personal experience with analogous trauma is as a hunter. I’ve seen animals go down after being shot, look completely immobilized, only to bound away as if uninjured as they were being approached for retrieval. Of course, they were seriously and in some cases even fatally injured, but not sufficiently to prevent a subsequent upsurge of effort to make a vigorous attempt at flight.

But I’d be more interested in someone’s expert opinion over my own . . .

Thanks Norman. I take your argument; but also the point I was making in this post was also questioning why YouTube has decided to take down all of the longer versions with that clip in them and yet keep up all the shorter versions with that clip missing.
Literally, one of the guys that originally uploaded a commentary on the longer/unedited version had that video removed by YT – yet his upload of the shorter/edited version has stayed up, despite having basically the same commentary.

Clear for me the opposition and resistance, wheat over tares, are those prepared to consider and call out hoax or false flags – and the ‘pedo swamp’. The flaunting of anomalies are purposeful. Building 7 to Norman Casio isn’t only cruel mockery but nasty ritual. Method in madness and “let’s see who’ll say 2+2=?”. ‘Bedlam’ is among the v.v.few. Declining interest or care and labouring over evidence. We’ll see sudden jolt of finance soon. The Net slowly sifting out the opp. At this stage gotta go for broke and hope. As for sensitivities over genuine victims/or loved ones? Irrelevant. Ignore. We’re at a war, for anything like the world as we’ve known in safer and healthier parts. False Flags are the necessary risk from the lackeys, undertaking or coerced, by the handful of families from hell. Best we rattle the online and – me pray – bust their sick, dark, ruse. Wide open. ‘Choose ye this day…’

Copyright Notice

All images and videos used on this blog (unless otherwise stated) are used on a 'Fair Use' basis. If you have any objection or complaint concerning use of an image or video, please contact me directly (using the contact form at the top of the page) and the offending item will be immediately removed. Thank you.
Also - to non-WordPress users - please, when re-posting articles from this site (either whole or in part), include a credit to The Burning Blogger of Bedlam and a link back to the source.

Meta

SUPPORT THIS BLOG

If you value independent journalism of this kind, consider supporting this blog with either a one-time or regular 'donation' (of any amount) via Paypal. With enough support, more time, energy and resources can be devoted to research and to higher quality content.